For DUncan-O to reconsider. Firstly your huge sum of comments about who are changing subjects and who believe lies for their conveniences are appreciated to an extent. But I don't think that by keep stating one mainstream view about a political issue is helpful in explaining facts. Remember a lie told by many can eventually be a truth, but it does not mean it is a truth after all! Thus I think it is quite important to clarify things objectively rather than using what may seem to be facts and misinterpret it just to criticise for the sake of it.

As a westerner myself I would like to talk about some points:

1. Usually many people believe that if a story is told by the majority, then it would be considered a truth (just like you said that many websites have many similar stories about China-tibet issues). Well let me tell you that in fact the ultimate fact MAY sometimes be held by the minorities. They are often ignored not because they don't have the freedom to say but their voices are much weaker against the mainstream and the Media. Hope I am not dissecting too much.

2. ALL Medias are NOT PERFECT! This means no matter East or West there are many Medias not doing their jobs! I hope you can see that BBC and CNN often do not report news objectively e.g. there was a big issue a few weeks ago on charity in Gaza, but BBC was not keen on reporting about it and many newspapers have raised the issue. CCTV is only recently beginning to become more transparent. But no need to get all fussy about it so long as one actually bothers to look over the borderlines of countries and listen to different versions about an event. After all it is quite ok to report only what we want to hear as citizens otherwise no media can make profits.

3. You brought out the issue that the Chinese accuse westerners of thinking to split China in pieces in the name of free tibet. I agree with you, but I have to say after I read from somewhere that the Dalai Lama has a map in mind that shows China in five chunks or 'five countries', I start to worry that Dalai Lama is a bit too ambitious in his 'pursue of tibet's freedom'! Of course there is also a claim that Dalai Lama wants to go back to tibet when he is older but some extremists do not want him to go back in the fear of him not claiming 'free Tibet' anymore.

4. The PRC whatever you think has helped improve tibet enormously since 1950s. Before 1950s, tibet was in a backward system when human-beings are classified in classes: the slaves, the ruling classes and the monks. Life was hard then but at present it really is much better. You might think I am changing subject but really you need to travel more like me and live in tibet for a few years. I did for a year and I had made many friends there and I really do think life in tibet isn't as terrible as what the BBC and the CNN and my fellow westerners have described! Oppression from PRC, well I am sure tibetans are happy and they don't feel that they are oppressed really!!!

5. China did not invade tibet. You might think I am too ambitious to say so but if China did, so did the British and the USA. Now this is actually from Dalai Lama funny enough. He claimed that the CIA did help him to organise some extremists to combat against PRC although the US denied. Dalai Lama actually was a strong follower of Mao until after his trip to India. It is complicated and not as simple as you think. If we keep talking about history then many wrong doings by the British and the USA like the 'Red Indian' issue should be brought out for fairness. Personally I think we should forget about that otherwise USA is not USA and Britain is not Britain!

6. You also comment on China in Africa. Well if you read some ECONOMIC statistics, then you will realize that China is helping Africa in the form of trading. The Chinese do demand some raw materials from Africa but it is in the legal boundary and the Chinese is willing to give technological supports helping Africa to escape from long term poverty which the World Bank set up mainly by westerners failed to do so. I am not saying China would definitely succeed but it is better than only giving 'bread and water' without building a 'water pump-line'! The percentage of trading between the EU and Africa is just 2% while the USA owns 8% of most African resources. China with Africa stands 10% in trading and China only owns 2% of Africa’s resources. You don't have to believe the figures but it does tell something.

7. ‘The truth is an inconvenient thing to the Chinese’, this is something you really shouldn’t say. This is worse than calling names because it has implications of being a racist and not showing understanding over your human friends! I am sure everyone is clever enough to judge, to find out and to be able to listen to views. The truth can be misinterpreted and it would then not be true.

8. Finally the current Media, according to Christopher Nimba, a US historian, is mostly quite unfair.

So you deny that 'the PRC opresses tibet brutally'. If you don't that means you are contradicting with yourself. By the way even the TS issue is not as simple as you think. You may think I am pushing my luck but if you research more than you know the TS issue has been interpreted in several versions. Some are just like what you say and some are unfortuantely go against you my friend. I am not angry at all I am happy to chat with you. I just think you are so fetish in your comments that make me fell disgusted. I mean if you hate China so much then you love China as much! Do you understand what I mean? LOVE and HATE are hard to say! HAHA!

Another thing what is your issue about where I come from. I told you I am a Westerner. If you don't believe that then ignore it. I see no relation between my nationality and our debating topic! No matter what race we are of the truth is the truth and there is no point accusing a country's national will and stirring up national feelings. Leave the Chinese alone, leave the 56 minorities alone and even leave the tibetan alone because it is none of your bussiness! It is not my bussiness, but I am not like you. I see things broadly unlike the narrow-minded you. I talk calmly trying to achieve some basic equality in my comments unlike you accusing other people for your own pleasure. You are still implying a sign of racism after all. No wonder nobody is listening to you even westerners. Do not use 'Chinese apologist' to cover yourself. Not all westerners have to agree with you to become your ideal 'westerner'. I don't have to be like you or on a same baot as you when you are wrong. I am sure I would agree with you if you start to say something appropriate and really 'logical'.

And don't get your feelings hurt, JC...I'm not changing the subject by criticizing China over TS. I only brought it up in the context of Tibet--China was heavily criticized internationally following those days in 1989 (again, I'm not judging, just stating the facts). If China uses similar methods in Tibet today, it would again result in China being heavily criticized internationally. In a way, I am praising China for being too smart to make the same mistake twice.Do you understand what I am trying to say? I don't know why I bother...most of this has been really silly, and it's brought out the worst in me.

AlexLK-"Robust discussion and debate" do not confer power; they imply exclusion from it. It sounds like a whitewash so CNN can make pretty with the billion-strong market they inadvertently ticked off. There's not much the NPC could accomplish anyways, what with only being allowed to meet for NINE DAYS out of the whole year.small fry-Dude, I already gave China mad props for helpin' out in Africa. I said, "Good job, China. Way to look out for your own interests." And I already explained why China wouldn't use those tactics you describe in Tibet: China lacks the national will. They learned their lesson from Tiananmen square in 1989, and they deeply fear becoming an international pariah again. And I don't speak a word of Chinese.John Charlton-Okay, dude, I am a loser. But I am not an Indian--I don't know why in the name of Brahma anyone would get that idea.And you are still not a Westerner.

AlexLK-I'm aware of your background; I have been reading your posts carefully. One of the things you said was:"The chinese people want Tibet to stay part of China. And if you'd like to focus on people living in Tibet, keep in mind that native Tibetans are quickly becoming a minority in Tibet with a large immigration of Han Chinese having taken place."You said these words, and I think you need to own up. The fact that the West has a rich history of doing just the same sort of thing to nations (including China) doesn't justify China doing it to Tibet. Two wrongs--or a thousand--do not make a right. Turdeniz called you out on your words, and your reply centered on just such a superficial treatment of "colonialism". Colonialism is just a word. I don't care what word you use--colonialism, progress, or the one I would use, culturocide, but you yourself (not news stories of doubtful veracity) pointed out the key fact here. Tibetans, with their own language, their own script, their own religion, their own rituals, their own stories, and their own way of life are becoming a minority in their own land because the CCP is making a concerted effort to drown their way of life. You are brushing this under the rug.I do see your point about the press only reporting negative stories, but the fact remains that there are a plethora of negative stories reported in Tibet. Right and wrong may be relative things, but 1200 people gone missing falls pretty heavily on the "wrong" side of the gray area. You (and several others) have hinted (or screamed) that maybe every single one of these reports of repression are conspiratorial lies. What is truth, then? Anecdotes from happy Tibetans, stories that are unavailable to me because I am not in the midst of a yearslong trek through Tibet? Convenient. Convenient and wrong anyways, since oppressed people are unlikely to express their disaffection to outsiders (especially when the outsider is of the group doing the oppressing) and downright terrified to express it to the men with truncheons and assault rifles. I guess I can't find truth anywhere.And this moral gray area you speak of is black-and-white for you--you make relativistic apologies for China's wrongdoings, saying logic is somehow universally ambivalent (I heartily disagree), but you offer no such quarter to the West: We can be wrong according to their morals, but they can't be wrong according to ours. The Chinese government COULD and SHOULD criticize the US--its closest allies regularly do. I think it would lessen the Western perception of China as this massive, monolithic, enigmatic entity whose motives are kept secret precisely because they are diabolical. Many of the Chinese posters on this forum are quite effectively shoring up this perception.I also think Western governments (not individual jerks like me) have been relatively circumspect about criticizing China, even over Tibet. Maybe the criticism has gone too far nonetheless--I don't know. As you said, it's difficult to find that balance, and you are much more familiar with Chinese culture than I am.But I find the notion that the West has to play by the East's rules because they're too polite to play by ours not only not quite fair but disingenuous. If the Chinese posters on this forum are any indication of the Chinese population at large (and you have repeatedly inferred that they are), they have NO hesitance about hurt feelings. I'll admit I've been rather a jerk--and I sincerely apologize for taking it to a personal level with you--but before I even said anything on this forum, I as a Westerner was named a liar, a thief, a murderer, a racist, a hypocrite, etc, etc, etc. Every past Western sin from Saigon to Sitting Bull has been drudged up, and all because someone dared to suggest that maybe China is currently being a little heavyhanded in Tibet.I disagree. China is being QUITE heavyhanded in Tibet, and the justification that "a few people can send society into chaos" won't fly in the face of the fact that these same people can have a very legitimate gripe. The race riots in the US during the '60s may not have been constructive, but that doesn't change the fact that the Blacks were right.But you seem to think that this ephemeral notion of "harmony" (just as some people think that the ephemeral notion of "freedom") trumps all. You say you're a firm believer in the social contract and that the US does not fulfill this ideal. But the US doesn't have to send troops into Colorado to quash independence movements. You ask that I try to understand why you like your new home better--fine. I understand. But all I ask from someone, anyone speaking from the Chinese perspective to answer manfully to the charge that the PRC is oppressing Tibet. The closest anyone has come is that it's done in the name of "harmony". Well, if that's harmony, I'll take "freedom" any day. Harmony through repression is not just a myth; it's a lie.

i think we have a problem when people start to quote wikipedia on very sophisticated matters. and back to the Tibetan issue -- my take is that the chinese government should just let go. what's there to gain (beside the national unity concept, which is really nebulous anyway)? you can't grow anything in the tibetan plateau; no companies would want to set up factories up there (cuz it's too costly to ship out and people may get high-altitude sickness and start throwing up and stuff); there's no mineral/energy resources extractable; and the people are mostly under-educated (i.e., no human talent). all there is about Tibet is a culture and a tradition, so let it thrive (or die) on its own if that's what the people want. and yes, please save up the government stimulus package money for all those areas in china that actually need the money and can use it for economic revival and improvement of average person's livelihood. just think about all the central revenue going to Tibet -- we can build wind farms and solar farms, provide better health care and public education, and unemployment benefits; the list goes on.the ungrateful shall not be rewarded.

@Duncan-OThank you for your compliment!Your saying of PRC's helping an African state to develop their railway, road, hospital and schools etc in exchange of mineral rights etc is not "noble" is your thinking!Assuming (I don't agree to your not "noble" term) the exchange is not at all "noble" but for that African state to desire a better tomorrow rather than living in poverty-stricken conditions; Don't you think praise-worthy or at least credit PRC is doing the timely assistance to that down-trodden state and her peoples if you compared the socalled Paris Consortium's somewhat not so humane action which costing the projects in abeyance!For God sake, that Paris Consortium should not object to such projects for the African peoples to have a better future and if not, Paris Consortium should take up the undertaking with generosity instead of blocking!As for Tibet, I hope you can read my posting to Nomde on March 03,2009 at 02.21 hours about PRC's atrocity; If PRC were to apply such tactics, there would not be any Tibetan language (spoken or written), culture, Tibetan monastery and Tibetan buddhism etc left in Tibet for Dalai Lama to fight back. If PRC's CCP can forget and forgive their bloody feud (about 20 millions of their CCP members and sympathizers perished in the civil war) with Taiwan's KMT (Nationalist Party) I cannot see how and why CCP would eliminate or maltreat Tibetan as you can see there are about 5 millions Tibetan living in Tibet and others provinces surrounding it.Since you have Chinese language understanding, I suggest you to visit China especially Tibet to obtain your first hand info rather than rely on media that may miss feed you; Hence, you lost the genuine news you wanted.

Oh another thing. It looks like Duncan-O may be an Indian who seems to love 'western democracy' so much he feels fetish! Oh, I have said something here. I love democracy neither 'Western' or 'Eastern'. But you can be quite fetish in your argument sometimes. Don't get too angry NOT GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH!!!!

You are seem to be losing in the debate, at least against me! Well again you kept saying that 'go to any websites and you will find THOUSANDS of reports of Tibetan discontent and brutal Chinese reactions to that discontent'. Well again I will keep saying to you if you go to tibet you will realize that you are pretty childish. I also find many and thousands of websites about the US's stupidty and their low IQ citizens and to be honest I think most of them are rubbish. But according to your 'logic', there are elements of truth in websites. I do agree with you but to what significant extent websites tell truths I really doubt. In conclusion if I am like you than I should stop travelling to America and just happily accept that 'the US citizens are easy to be fooled by their government (current Obama) or even by Bush and they are of low IQ'. I hope such an accusation based on thousands of websites would not offend you :). You can ignore my comment then you admit you are a loser, if not challenge me in a calm way or you will lose too! :-}

Democracy can elect the peoples' representative but there is pitfall too such as misused influences and money buying votes methods can do wonder and sent the unscrupulous and below par peoples to power peak and did untold damages to the nation.The recent finance tsunami is a very clear proof.One may doubt and condemn the CCP's systems of choosing their top man such as president and prime minister; You think it is easy for you to be selected? The process is very tortuous and great patience and you must have good educational academic back ground and proven record of working efficiency and dedication within the party and govt jobs. The ladder of climbing the hierarchy almost an mission impossible; Even after you were chosen, the rest of the peoples like other politburo members and retired old guard who still very influential are keeping a watchful eyes on you.You think the PRC president and prime minister can commit an act like an ex president (not PRC) during meeting in asking his secretary of state whether he can go to the wash room? If it was so, he would be shown an exit door.

From CNN: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/03/03/china.meeting.economy/index.html"In the past, the NPC has been dismissed as a "flower-vase," a largely ceremonial rubber-stamp parliament which merely endorses Communist Party decisions. But in recent years, it has seen robust discussion and debate."A very different perspective from the Economists :-p. At the end of the day, what this illustrates more than anything else is that Western media has quite a bit of subjectivity intself. That's one thing I've become so much more aware of while living in China--before, I used to read CNN and the Economist and take for face value. Now I read them, see their claims and suggestions, and then look around not find the reality they are proporting to exist. At the end of the day, I'll take my sources in China over the ones from the outside when it comes to issues relating to China. It's obvious that there is often a divide between official policy and practice, but the Chinese people are a lot more aware of those divides and what actually happens than people living outside the country.

Froy,If you read a bit more in the article about the politburo, you'll find they say that the power of the politburo comes from the fact that its members hold very senior offices in the government. For instance, President Hu and Premier Wen both sit on the committee. And again, you're claiming common knowledge about that the politburo is supreme commander of China, yet a chinese official is telling me otherwise--so I guess its not quite common knowledge. And about the NPC not making decisions, read the article--its become much more influential than before. But I think the part is most important to consider is how all of these offices get filled. China doesn't have 3 people deciding who will in office. There is a lot of decision making and involvement across levels. So to decry China's government as being led by a few people in a classic dictatorship style government is inappropriate--its like saying that the US government is a dictatorship because the president and a few key members of the various committees in Congress can heavily determine decisions. People won't call it that because of how the president and the members of congress get there. China has a different system, but at the end of the day, elections matter, and they trickle all the way to the top, not the other way around.

Also, from The Economist, just now:"The NPC is a rubber-stamp affair at the best of times. But this year China has in effect dropped any pretence that it has a serious role. To save money, officials say, it has been shortened to nine days. Its schedule is as leisurely as ever."http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13234906&source=features_box1

Alex, nominally and officially, the NPC is the highest decision-making body, but as everything in Chinese politics, things are actually different from the official version. The National Congress of the CCP has a higher authority than the NPC, just like the Provincial CCP Secretaries have a higher authority than the Provincial Governors. This is common knowledge in China. And since the PSC is the highest body of the CCP, the Standing Committee is the sancta sanctorum of China. All presidents of China now have to be part of the PSC before becoming presidents, and they all have previously been provincial CCP secretaries, not provincial governors.From Wikipedia:"Currently the Politburo Standing Committee acts as the de facto highest and most powerful decision-making body in China. Its membership is closely followed by both the national media as well as political watchers abroad. Historically, the role of the PSC has varied and evolved. During the Cultural Revolution, for example, the PSC had little power."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politburo_Standing_Committee_of_the_Communist_Party_of_China

Froy, I don't know what to tell you. I was personally told by a Chinese government official that the politburo is no longer in charge and that it is the NPC that makes the ultimate decisions. Being that this official is a family member, I tend to believe his credibility. Of course at the end of the day, he might be wrong, I might be wrong, even CNN might be wrong. I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree about our assessments of where the power resides in China.